Re: [PATCH] clk: at91: fix at91sam9x5 peripheral clock number
From: <Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com>
Date: 2019-02-20 10:20:51
Also in:
linux-clk, lkml
On 19/02/2019 at 17:51, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
nck() looks at the last id in an array and unfortunately, at91sam9x35_periphck has a sentinel, hence the id is 0 and the calculated
Well, the logic for all other SoC clk files is to not have such a sentinel and deal differently with this type of array: why not modify this file to match with others?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
number of peripheral clocks is 1 instead of a maximum of 31. Fixes: 1eabdc2f9dd8 ("clk: at91: add at91sam9x5 PMCs driver") Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com> --- drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c b/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c index 2fe225a697df..d37e7ed9eb90 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c@@ -144,8 +144,7 @@ static void __init at91sam9x5_pmc_setup(struct device_node *np, return; at91sam9x5_pmc = pmc_data_allocate(PMC_MAIN + 1, - nck(at91sam9x5_systemck), - nck(at91sam9x35_periphck), 0); + nck(at91sam9x5_systemck), 31, 0);
I would prefer like it's done on other SoC clk files.
if (!at91sam9x5_pmc) return;
-- Nicolas Ferre _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel